GDL - full bundle of revision notes

CORE PRINCIPLES OF THE UK SOURCES OF THE UK 3. THE ROYAL PREROGATIVE
Public W1 - Constitution CONSTITUTION CONSTITUTION: Dicey
a. The rule of law  Acts of parliament “ every act which the
WHAT IS A CONSTITUTION?  Case law
b. Separation of powers government can lawfully do
 Defines a States fundamental political  Royal Prerogative
c. The supremacy of Parliament  Constitutional Conventions without the authority of an Act
principles
A. THE RULE OF LAW of Parliament “
 Guarantees the rights and freedoms of 1. ACTS OF PARLIAMENT
 Dicey – formal approach  Exercised in the name of the
THE UK CONSTITUTION : Thorburn v Sunderland City monarch
 Lord Bingham – substantive Council
 Unwritten  Are what remains of the absolute
approach  Constitutional statutes condition
 Monarchical powers which were exercised by
 Considered in more detail – next the legal relationship between the
 Unitary workshop state and the citizen in a general, the monarch and haven’t been
 Flexible overarching matter removed
 Informal separation of powers GENERAL PRINCIPLES: EXAMPLES:
Examples of Acts of Parliament:  Foreign affairs – declaration of war,
 No arbitrary exercise of power by  Magna Carta 1215 – first
state/government signing international treaties
assertion of limits on power of
 Laws should be made properly –  Domestic affairs – summoning of
monarch
follow procedure  Bill of Right 1689 – remove power
4. CONSTITUTIONAL
 Laws should be clear – citizens only of monarch to suspend Acts of
Parliament CONVENTIONS – (NON LEGAL
punished for clearly defined breach
 Parliament Acts 1911, 1949 – SOURCE)
of law
limit the power of the House of Marshall and Moodie – definition
 Laws should be certain – not Lords IMPORTANT CONVENTIONS
retrospective  European Communities Act  Monarch plays no active role in
 Equality before the law – access to 1972 – incorporated EU law into government – powers exercised on
representation domestic law
her behalf by government
B. SEPARATION OF POWERS – UK  Police and Criminal Evidence Act
1984  Monarch will not refuse royal
Montesquieu
 Public Order Act 1986 assent
 To prevent arbitrary or oppressive
 Human Rights Act 1998 –  Monarch will appoint PM who is
government, the different branches
incorporated ECHR into national law best to command confidence in
of state have to be kept separate
2. CASE LAW Commons
BRANCHES OF STATE:
A. Residual freedom –  All government ministers will be
 The legislative B. Actions of the state must have members of House of Lords of
 The executive legitimate authority – no arbitrary House of Commons – PM - member
 The judiciary use of power - Entick v
of House of Commons which is
Carrington
C. Legal disputes should be resolved democratically elected
C. SUPREMACY OF PARLIAMENT by the judiciary – separation of  Monarch will appoint and dismiss
 Common law doctrine in which powers - government ministers on advice of
courts acknowledge that legislation Prohibitions del Roy PM
enacted by parliament takes (1607)  Individual Ministerial Responsibility
precedence over common law D. Haebus Corpus and individual
 Collective Cabinet Responsibility
liberty – legality of detention can
Dicey  Unelected House of Lords will not
be tested
 Parliament has the right to make or ‘Belmarsh Case’ reject legislation that is important
unmake any law E. Right to a fair hearing to manifesto of democratically
 No person or body has the right to F. Parliamentary supremacy – elected gov
override the legislation of Pickin v British  UK parliament cannot legislate on
parliament Railways Board devolved matters in Scotland
G. Judicial review of executive action

, KEY CASES
Public W1 - Conventions Continued Madzimbamuto v Lardner Burke
 Validity of act of parliament was challenged on the basis that there was an established
INDIVIDUAL MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY convention that the UK Parliament would not legislate for Southern Rhodesia
 Running and proper administration of departments + personal conduct  Court held that a constitutional convention, no matter how important, can have no legal
 No conflict of interest – public duties and private interests effect to limit supremacy of parliament - Parliament can pass legislation which runs
COLLECTIVE CABINET RESPONSIBILITY contrary to an existing convention
 Cabinet responsible for actions of government as a whole Miller
 Must retain confidence of Commons – if defeated government must resign  Court re-affirmed that courts cannot enforce conventions
 United in public support of government – must resign if want to speak out  This is because conventions operate in the political sphere alone
publicly against policy  Sewel Convention had not been turned into statute – there was no legal remedy
A-G v Jonathan Cape
 AG wanted to rely on Collective Cabinet Responsibility to prevent publication of a book by
a previous cabinet minister
 A court can restrain publication of Cabinet material only where there is a breach of
confidence or it is in the public interest to do so Time lapse is important




SHOULD UK CONSTITUTION BE
CODIFIED?
FOR
R v Miller  ‘elective dictatorship’ – currently, Parliament has
majority in the House of Commons, means there is
a lack of checks and balances
 Clarity and certainty
 Protected constitution
AGAINST
 Lose supremacy of parliament
 Selling point of constitution is flexibility
 Judges have more prominent role

,